Lost Farm & Ranchland Spurs Odd Alliance "Still, some experts do not believe the farmland and ranchland acreage has decreased as fast as USDA numbers indicate. William Travis, a University of Colorado geography professor who studies growth and land use in the West, is skeptical of USDA's numbers, since they rely on farmers and ranchers to return forms and report their acreage, rather than using surveys of the land." Land Letter July 6, 2004 AGRICULTURE Waning farm and ranchland in the West spurs unusual union Allison A. Freeman, Land Letter reporter With new indications that an ongoing drought and development pressures are taking their toll on Western farms and ranches, those who work the land have found some unlikely allies -- environmentalists, who fear that slumping farmland acreage means the loss of valuable open space and wildlife habitat. The Agriculture Department's 2002 census, released last month, showed a continued gradual decline in the amount of land devoted to agriculture across the United States. And the states that lost the most acreage since 1997 were all in the West -- with Texas, Colorado and New Mexico taking the top three spots. The USDA census, performed every five years since 1974, is a national survey of all agricultural operations across the United States. It defines a farm as any operation that normally produces or sells $1,000 or more in agricultural products annually. The census showed continued losses in the amount of land devoted to agriculture and the number of farms. Farming activities took place on 938 million acres in the United States in 2002, down from 955 million acres in 1997. Meanwhile, the nation lost 100,000 farms over the same time period, dropping to 2.1 million in 2002. Texas, which has the most farm and ranchland in the United States, also lost the most, over 4 million acres. It slipped from almost 134 million acres in 1997 to less than 130 million five years later. Colorado and New Mexico also lost over 1 million acres each in that five-year time period, leaving New Mexico with almost 45 million acres and Colorado with 27.5 million acres in 2002. Those states had a lot more acreage to lose than an Eastern state like Pennsylvania, which only had 65,000 acres of farmland in 1997. But the percentage of farmland loss over the five-year period in Colorado and New Mexico was also significant -- about 4 percent and 3 percent respectively. Almost every state lost some farmland in 2002 from the five years prior. Only Alaska, Maine, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming saw increases, ranging from 0.11 percent in Nebraska to 4 percent in Maine. The overall picture of declining agriculture acreage was not altogether unexpected. USDA economists were not surprised by the loss. And Bob Young of the American Farm Bureau noted that the nationwide decline had not been as dramatic as in years past. Some of the acreage decrease could be attributable to greater productivity and improved technology that allow farmers to achieve higher yields with less land, he added. The census recorded 2.3 million farms with over 1 billion acres of land in 1974 and 2.2 million farms with 987 million acres of land in 1982. And those numbers do not account for agricultural operations that did not return census survey forms, as the most recent survey did. Still, some experts do not believe the farmland and ranchland acreage has decreased as fast as USDA numbers indicate. William Travis, a University of Colorado geography professor who studies growth and land use in the West, is skeptical of USDA's numbers, since they rely on farmers and ranchers to return forms and report their acreage, rather than using surveys of the land. Developing green acres Whatever the rate of the loss, it is clear that the amount of land devoted to agriculture is shrinking. Robyn Miller of the American Farmland Trust said the decline in agricultural land is partly due to the conversion of farms for other types of development, notably homes and businesses. On a per capita basis, the amount of land devoted to residential development almost doubled over the past 20 years, according to a recent American Farmland Trust study. The study also found that housing lots of 10 acres or more have accounted for over half of all U.S. land developed over the past decade. "It's how we're using the land that poses a real threat to our productive farmland," Miller said. The pressure from development is acute in the Rockies, said Daniel Kemis of the Center for the Rocky Mountain West, who noted the region has been the fastest-growing area of the country for more than a decade. Two of the states that lost the most farmland, Colorado and New Mexico, are also experiencing rapid population growth. The Colorado Demographics Service estimated the state's population at 4 million in 2000 and projected a population of 7 million people in 2030. "We're definitely worried," said Monica Piergrossi of the Colorado Environmental Coalition. "Colorado farmland and open space is being gobbled up by unplanned sprawling development ... whether 35 acres or a ranchette, we're seeing it all over." Skeptics of USDA's numbers also admit there have been steep declines in farmland in Colorado's faster-growing counties, like Boulder. Travis said farmland has increased in some areas, but in places where it has decreased, it has often gone toward development. "By definition, when the land is taken out of agriculture, it is developed into other use," said Travis. "That should be no surprise." Drying up farm production Ranchers and farmers are facing increased pressure to sell their land to developers, however, fueled in part by an ongoing drought. The West's drought, which some experts have said is as bad as America's dustbowl days, has made profitable production more difficult for some farmers and ranchers who were already on the margins. "It has been mostly due to the drought as much as anything," said Chad Vorthmann of the Colorado Farm Bureau, on the state's million-acre loss. Vorthmann said development and drought have worked hand in hand to put a strain on agriculture by shrinking water resources. Erik Ness of the New Mexico Farm Bureau also pointed to the drought as the chief reason for his state's million-acre loss of farmland. "When you don't have grass, you don't have cows," Ness said, adding that many farmers have had to sell land for development to make a profit. But Ness also said federal regulations make it harder for ranchers to cope with the drought and stay in business. The Forest Service has cut back its grazing permits because of the drought, and Ness said compliance with the Endangered Species Act and other regulations has put further strain on farmers. Widespread concern over vanishing farmland With so many pressures acting on farmers and ranchers, the disappearance of agricultural lands is prompting concerns across the political spectrum. Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey pointed to development as a danger to ranching and the environment, in remarks he made last month at a hearing on grazing in a House Resources subcommittee. "The single greatest environmental threat is not public land grazing but conversion of privately owned ranchland to subdivisions," Rey said. "All the growth is being channelled in the wildland-urban interface, and that development is the root of environmental problems, like wildfires." Grazing has been a hot issue in the West, particularly in New Mexico and Arizona, where there has been tension between environmental groups, the Forest Service and owners of grazing allotments. Environmentalists say cattle grazing causes a host of ecological ills, including eroded streambanks, decreased plant diversity and compacted soils. Kemis said that in the past decade more and more environmentalists have started working to preserve farmland as a more palatable alternative to residential development. "Traditionally there has been a fair amount of uneasiness, if not open hostility between environmentalists and farmers and ranchers," said Kemis. "That has begun to change as we have seen that protecting open, working landscapes is sometimes as important as preserving wild lands." Considering the alternatives, ranching provides more protection for the environment, according to Rey. "The worst-managed ranch provides better wildlife habitat than the best subdivision," he said. "We're going to destroy what we have if it is all broken up into acre and half-acre lots." - END -